You would be mad to use Erzats for performance anyway, so I'd wish for 
correctness or similarity. It would also serve as a documentation of what it 
takes to implement a full PicoLisp. Sort of a portable spec. 

On June 25, 2014 4:45:12 PM CEST, Alexander Burger <a...@software-lab.de> wrote:
>Hi Jon,
>
>> If you in normal PicoLisp do any of the following, without any use of
>‘make' …
>> (chain (1 2 3))
>> (link 1 2 3)
>> (yoke 1 2 3)
>> … then you’ll get a "Not making” error message.
>> 
>> However, if you do the same with Ersatz, you’ll get a
>> java.lang.NullPointerException for ‘chain’ and ‘link’.
>
>You are right, this is a disputable issue.
>
>In fact, I deliberately omitted the runtime checks for a 'make'
>environment in ErsatzLisp, because the JVM already does such a check (a
>NullPointerException is also an error message, albeit a rather
>unprecise
>one).
>
>If you take a closer look, you see that most explicit error checks
>which
>exist in PicoLisp are omitted in ErsatzLisp. For simplicity, brevity
>and
>performance.
>
>
>> For (yoke 1 2 3) you’ll get 3
>
>This is indeed unaesthetic, yes. At least here it is needed.
>
>We could easily add proper error messages to ErsatzLisp too, checking
>for non-NULL 'Env.Make' and 'Env.Yoke'.
>
>How is the general opinion on that?
>♪♫ Alex
>-- 
>UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe

-- 
Skickat från min Android-telefon med K-9 E-post. Ursäkta min fåordighet.

Reply via email to